Recoil

What determines the force of recoil in a 2 or 4 inch 357 mag revolver? is it
Muzzle Energy ft·lb or Muzzle Velocity ft/sec. or a combo of both?
I apologize if this has been asked before, but as I said before, 45 yrs. ago when I was on the Police Reserves you used what the Police used. Today, I am totally
lost. There are so many choices and I do not re-load my ammo. As always, all responses are welcome and will be avidly considered.
 
Each action has an equal and opposite action. The more energy a gun puts out, the more energy that comes back. Mass of the gun comes into play however, and the more mass the gun has, the more energy it takes to move it. To the shooter this translates to less recoil.

A 16 ounce snubby will have far more recoil than a large frame steel revolver given the same load.

Other factors such as grip rear surface area play a role in perceived recoil. Recoil may be the same, but if that force is spread over a larger area of the hand it feels like less recoil.

Look up Newton's second and third laws of physics.
 
Last edited:
The free recoil velocity of a gun is equal to [the velocity of the bullet times the weight of the bullet plus the 4700 fps* times the weight of the powder] divided by the weight of the gun.

The recoil energy of the gun is the velocity squared times the gun mass.

The force on the hand is mass of the hand times the acceleration of the hand.

The threshold for pain in the hand is skin pressure ~ 20 psi.

*That is the velocity for center of mass of the gas given in the book, "Hayes Elements of Ordnance" 1939.
 
I recommend Beartooth Bullets web site, great info for reloaders and online ballistic calculators to help find solutions for questions you have not thought to ask yet
 
A fairly technical discussion about recoil is going on here:

http://thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=555506

it's about rifles but the math and concepts still apply...

UNLESS...maybe you want to talk about the difference due to barrel length? Maybe thinking the shorter barrel might flip up more than the longer one?

I dunno.

When these discussions start I get out the popcorn and watch the heavy hitters have at it.
 
For the actual numbers, the online calculators are good. You need to know the powder charge and the velocity.
I've chronographed some 357 factory loads and some handloads. My observation is the felt recoil tracks pretty well with the muzzle energy.
Factory loads that produce 500 ft-lb of muzzle energy kick harder than loads with 400 ft-lb or less, regardless of bullet weight. Full power loads are all about the same. 110 grain Winchesters, and the Fiocchi 357 load with the Hornady 158 gr XTP, don't kick bad, and they're lower energy. 38 Specials don't kick.
For felt recoil from a 357, to me the grip, and how the grip fits my hand, are as important as the actual recoil.
 
I had over 100,000 posts on the gun forum on usenet in the 1990s before there was a gun list on the www.

I have seen a lot of gun posts.

Confusing bullet kinetic energy with momentum to calculate recoil will never end.
 
well Doc, the best way to put it would be, the heavier the gun, the less "felt" recoil, a gun with a longer bbl is going to heavier.
 
Confusing bullet kinetic energy with momentum to calculate recoil will never end.
And it will never work.
I hope you didn't translate 'my observation ... felt recoil...' to mean 'calculated recoil.'
 
Especially for handguns, much of the recoil, or lack of it, is due to the effectiveness of the grip.
At least as much the shooters' gripping technique as the design and shape of the grip itself.
 
G. willikers, you are speaking of "felt recoil" or "transmitted" recoil (several terms for the same thing). I agree. It applies to rifles as well. Lots of people claim that a 30-30 is a soft recoiling rifle - and if you look at pure calculated numbers they would be right. However, anyone who shoots a straight-stocked Win '94 without a recoil pad can attest to the fact that it transmits what recoil there is straight into the shooters shoulder.
 
Back
Top